Is Sheikh Khazali changing priorities?
It seems that another resistance faction and a veteran of the jihad during the NATO occupation have exchanged the tactics of resistance for political gain. Asaib al-Haq slowly repeats the path of the BADR organization, only if the former military wing of the ISCI (Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq) has never claimed the status of a “leader of jihad”, and the League of the Righteous has been positioning itself as such for a long time. It all started with the fact that at the very beginning of the work of the new Prime Minister Muhammad Shia al-Sudani, there was information that there was competition between Asaib and Kataeb Hezbollah for the position of head of intelligence in Iraq. But Sheikh Khazali does not stop and then it became known about the appointment of other representatives of the “League of the Righteous” to a number of government positions by the Prime Minister Al-Sudani(this is reported by the telegram channel “Larsa”).
Apparently, Sheikh Khazali is trying to kill three birds with one stone. Firstly, the head of Asaib al-Haq wants to enjoy power for the first time in a long time and impose his vision of “the development of Iraqi society.” 2 – Sheikh Khazali is trying to overshadow absolutely all the leaders of the “coordination structure”, and in the future “help” to complete their political career. 3 – The Sheikh sees himself as a counterweight to the popular charismatic cleric Muqtada Sadr. Therefore, strengthening their positions at the state level should help Sheikh Khazali to confront the “always oppositional” Sadr.
Personally, I was not surprised by the behavior of Sheikh Khazali, it is enough to recall the strange words of the leader of Asaib al-Haq immediately after the murder of the legendary Suleimani and Muhandis. At that moment, in an interview, the sheikh said that allegedly the local resistance was ready to immediately strike at the Americans, but due to the fact that the Iranians “delayed the signal”, the Iraqis did not attack the occupiers. That is, does Sheik Khazali need to get an order from Tehran once again to organize the elimination of colonialism? In any case, even if the Iranians have conceived other measures to avenge Suleimani, this does not remove responsibility from the Iraqis!!!! For Iraq is a separate “independent country” and the Muslims there are obliged to form their own response to the occupiers, but this did not happen. Another curious incident of the sheikh occurred a year after the murder of Suleimani and Muhandis. Then, in an interview with the al-Ahd channel, the sheikh said that the alleged Turkish intervention is more dangerous than the American presence….. Here, as they say, no comments. It is difficult to imagine how the influence of the United States and Turkey on world politics and Iraq in particular can be compared.
Analyzing the behavior of the leader of the League of the Righteous, we see that he is only interested in political capital, respectively, his ideas for “transforming the country” are ordinary populism. The Sheikh is not going to take revenge on the Americans for the murder of Suleimani and Muhandis, and after his organization received a number of government posts, the Sheikh even put on pause the question of Turkish intervention. About Zionism in self-proclaimed Kurdistan, also not a word.
It seems that the Iraqi theater of political absurdity has been replenished with a new actor, which once again proves the rottenness of the quota system and the lack of Islamic revolutionary thinking among yesterday’s jihad leaders. Critics from the Islamic movements of Iraq were right again when they said that the leaders of the coordination structure needed only power and oil revenue. Their second thesis will be confirmed very soon – “only religious figures can change Iraq for the better.”
In conclusion, it is necessary to ask a rhetorical question. Do the Americans know that Sheikh Khazali is trying to fill the government in Al-Sudani with his people? Of course they do. Is it possible to say that there is some kind of coordination of the actions of the Sheikh and the Americans? Of course, if Washington was not satisfied with something, then surely the Americans would have followed active actions specifically against Asaib al-Haq, but this does not happen. Conclusion – everyone is satisfied with everything.